Here are some resources for anyone interested in the historical aspects of the bodhisattva path in Sri Lanka and other Theravāda locations:

Chandawimala Thero, Rangama. Bodhicitta in Theravāda Buddhism with Special Reference to the Abhayagiri Fraternity in Ancient Sri Lanka. Presentation for Third Korean Conference of Buddhist Studies, 2006.

Samathavipassanabhāvanavākkapprakaraṇaṃ, Dvidhāvuttakammaṭṭhāna (Pāḷi prose. Beg. Vanditvā sirasā buddhaṃ … Okāsa okāsa bho sabbaññu Gotama sitthakadīpa… The 13 ch. titles are same as in Amatākaravaṇṇanā with which it is found in the same MS bundle. Maybedvi dhā refers to the verse text followed by the prose text. Cf prec. and next entries. N 6601(85ii).

The heart of the path is SO simple. No need for long explanations. Give up clinging to love and hate, just rest with things as they are. That is all I do in my own practice. Do not try to become anything. Do not make yourself into anything. Do not be a meditator. Do not become enlightened. When you sit, let it be. When you walk, let it be. Grasp at nothing. Resist nothing. Of course, there are dozens of meditation techniques to develop samadhi and many kinds of vipassana. But it all comes back to this - just let it all be. Step over here where it is cool, out of the battle. - Ajahn Chah

Yeah, well, it can be without doubt shown that there were Mahayana bits and pieces in the Theravadin history of ideas, but that, even taking all of the above to account, is a long, long way from finding within the mainstream Theravada anything that looks like the Mahayana bodhisattva path structures and deified Buddha and diminished arhat that characterizes any of the major hermeneutic schools of the Mahayana.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

tiltbillings wrote:Yeah, well, it can be without doubt shown that there were Mahayana bits and pieces in the Theravadin history of ideas, but that, even taking all of the above to account, is a long, long way from finding within the mainstream Theravada anything that looks like the Mahayana bodhisattva path structures and deified Buddha and diminished arhat that characterizes any of the major hermeneutic schools of the Mahayana.

Have you read Tochiichi Endo's (formerly from Kelaniya Uni) book on the Theravada concept of the Buddha?

My recently moved Blog, containing some of my writings on the Buddha Dhamma, as well as a number of translations from classical Buddhist texts and modern authors, liturgy, etc.: Huifeng's Prajnacara Blog.

tiltbillings wrote:Yeah, well, it can be without doubt shown that there were Mahayana bits and pieces in the Theravadin history of ideas, but that, even taking all of the above to account, is a long, long way from finding within the mainstream Theravada anything that looks like the Mahayana bodhisattva path structures and deified Buddha and diminished arhat that characterizes any of the major hermeneutic schools of the Mahayana.

Have you read Tochiichi Endo's (formerly from Kelaniya Uni) book on the Theravada concept of the Buddha?

I am sure you are going to tell me I am full of toe-nail pickings. I have read the suttas, which are not quite congruent with Theravadin doctrine, and the suttas also carry a certain amount of baggage of valorizing the Buddha, but nothing like the stuff that can be found in the Mahayana.

So, no I have not read Endo's book. What am I missing?

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

tiltbillings wrote:Yeah, well, it can be without doubt shown that there were Mahayana bits and pieces in the Theravadin history of ideas, but that, even taking all of the above to account, is a long, long way from finding within the mainstream Theravada anything that looks like the Mahayana bodhisattva path structures and deified Buddha and diminished arhat that characterizes any of the major hermeneutic schools of the Mahayana.

Have you read Tochiichi Endo's (formerly from Kelaniya Uni) book on the Theravada concept of the Buddha?

I am sure you are going to tell me I am full of toe-nail pickings. I have read the suttas, which are not quite congruent with Theravadin doctrine, and the suttas also carry a certain amount of baggage of valorizing the Buddha, but nothing like the stuff that can be found in the Mahayana.

So, no I have not read Endo's book. What am I missing?

"toe-nail pickings"?

"Missing?" A fairly good study of the concept of the Buddha in the Theravada tradition. Which, of course, would be helpful to utilize before any comparisons with the Mahayana could be made.

And yup, the Theravada Buddha is 16 feet tall and pretty much all the rest. Though I'm not sure if the docetism and "has always been enlightened" ideas are there. Ideas which, as we know, were only accepted by parts of the Mahayana, anyway.

Prof Endo does describe this as the "deification" or "apotheosis" of the Buddha, which gives the general idea.

My recently moved Blog, containing some of my writings on the Buddha Dhamma, as well as a number of translations from classical Buddhist texts and modern authors, liturgy, etc.: Huifeng's Prajnacara Blog.

Paññāsikhara wrote:"Missing?" A fairly good study of the concept of the Buddha in the Theravada tradition. Which, of course, would be helpful to utilize before any comparisons with the Mahayana could be made.

And yup, the Theravada Buddha is 16 feet tall and pretty much all the rest. Though I'm not sure if the docetism and "has always been enlightened" ideas are there. Ideas which, as we know, were only accepted by parts of the Mahayana, anyway.

Prof Endo does describe this as the "deification" or "apotheosis" of the Buddha, which gives the general idea.

From what I read about the book, it is a study of what is found in the commentarial literature, but for me what would be far more interesting is a study of the differences betwwen the Commentaries and the suttas. Though there is some titanization of the Buddha in the suttas, the over all picture of the Buddha in the suttas is far more human than not.

Docetism is clearly identified in the Kathavatthu and soundly rejected.

Ideas which, as we know, were only accepted by parts of the Mahayana, anyway.

Which is why there was this push within Indian Mahayana towards systemitizing things, trying make order out of a wildly diverse bunch of "sacred texts" and ideas.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

If you read the introduction to the Nalaka Sutta (which seems to be a commentary inserted before the actual dialogue of the Buddha) you can clearly see the beginnings of the Bodhisattva doctrine taking shape already -- the little prince at his birth is already the greatest being in the universe destined to roll the wheel of Dhamma:http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

"Monks, there is the case where some worthless men study the Dhamma: dialogues, narratives of mixed prose and verse, explanations, verses, spontaneous exclamations, quotations, birth stories, amazing events, question & answer sessions [the earliest classifications of the Buddha's teachings]. Having studied the Dhamma, they don't ascertain the meaning (or: the purpose) of those Dhammas [5] with their discernment. Not having ascertained the meaning of those Dhammas with their discernment, they don't come to an agreement through pondering. They study the Dhamma both for attacking others and for defending themselves in debate. They don't reach the goal for which [people] study the Dhamma. Their wrong grasp of those Dhammas will lead to their long-term harm & suffering. Why is that? Because of the wrong-graspedness of the Dhammas.

"Suppose there were a man needing a water-snake, seeking a water-snake, wandering in search of a water-snake. He would see a large water-snake and grasp it by the coils or by the tail. The water-snake, turning around, would bite him on the hand, on the arm, or on one of his limbs, and from that cause he would suffer death or death-like suffering. Why is that? Because of the wrong-graspedness of the water-snake. In the same way, there is the case where some worthless men study the Dhamma... Having studied the Dhamma, they don't ascertain the meaning of those Dhammas with their discernment. Not having ascertained the meaning of those Dhammas with their discernment, they don't come to an agreement through pondering. They study the Dhamma both for attacking others and for defending themselves in debate. They don't reach the goal for which [people] study the Dhamma. Their wrong grasp of those Dhammas will lead to their long-term harm & suffering. Why is that? Because of the wrong-graspedness of the Dhammas.more: Alagaddupama Sutta: The Water-Snake Simile

The Raft Simile

"Monks, I will teach you the Dhamma compared to a raft, for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of holding onto. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."

"As you say, lord," the monks responded to the Blessed One.

The Blessed One said: "Suppose a man were traveling along a path. He would see a great expanse of water, with the near shore dubious & risky, the further shore secure & free from risk, but with neither a ferryboat nor a bridge going from this shore to the other. The thought would occur to him, 'Here is this great expanse of water, with the near shore dubious & risky, the further shore secure & free from risk, but with neither a ferryboat nor a bridge going from this shore to the other. What if I were to gather grass, twigs, branches, & leaves and, having bound them together to make a raft, were to cross over to safety on the other shore in dependence on the raft, making an effort with my hands & feet?' Then the man, having gathered grass, twigs, branches, & leaves, having bound them together to make a raft, would cross over to safety on the other shore in dependence on the raft, making an effort with his hands & feet. [7] Having crossed over to the further shore, he might think, 'How useful this raft has been to me! For it was in dependence on this raft that, making an effort with my hands & feet, I have crossed over to safety on the further shore. Why don't I, having hoisted it on my head or carrying on my back, go wherever I like?' What do you think, monks: Would the man, in doing that, be doing what should be done with the raft?"

"No, lord."

"And what should the man do in order to be doing what should be done with the raft? There is the case where the man, having crossed over, would think, 'How useful this raft has been to me! For it was in dependence on this raft that, making an effort with my hands & feet, I have crossed over to safety on the further shore. Why don't I, having dragged it on dry land or sinking it in the water, go wherever I like?' In doing this, he would be doing what should be done with the raft. In the same way, monks, I have taught the Dhamma compared to a raft, for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of holding onto. Understanding the Dhamma as taught compared to a raft, you should let go even of Dhammas, to say nothing of non-Dhammas."more: Alagaddupama Sutta: The Water-Snake Simile

"The Bodhisatta's Austerities"

63. "Rightly speaking, were it to be said of anyone: 'A being not subject to delusion has appeared in the world for the welfare and happiness of many, out of compassion for the world, for the good, welfare and happiness of gods and humans,' it is of me indeed that rightly speaking this should be said." The Great Discourse on the Lion's Roar

Last edited by Hanzze on Sat Jan 15, 2011 9:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

Just that! *smile*...We Buddhists must find the courage to leave our temples and enter the temples of human experience, temples that are filled with suffering. If we listen to Buddha, Christ, or Gandhi, we can do nothing else. The refugee camps, the prisons, the ghettos, and the battlefields will become our temples. We have so much work to do. ... Peace is Possible! Step by Step. - Samtach Preah Maha Ghosananda "Step by Step" http://www.ghosananda.org/bio_book.html

BUT! it is important to become a real Buddhist first. Like Punna did: Punna Sutta Nate sante baram sokham _()_

It's remarkably absent. Which would lead one who gives the suttas precedence to the conclusion that the Buddha would have us take the path to Arahantship. Guess it depends on who you take as your teacher. Many people enjoy the Buddha's wisdom and delight in practicing meditation, but otherwise do not surrender to the idea that the Buddha is the incomparable teacher of man kind and therefore they do not defer to him, but refer, especially when it comes to mental pleasure seeking. Unfortunately (as happens to some), once Buddhism is relegated to a scholarly pursuit of knowledge then it is no longer regarded as an urgent medicine for a pressing issue.

"There is the case where a monk, as day departs and night returns, reflects: 'Many are the [possible] causes of my death. A snake might bite me, a scorpion might sting me, a centipede might bite me. That would be how my death would come about. That would be an obstruction for me. Stumbling, I might fall; my food, digested, might trouble me; my bile might be provoked, my phlegm... piercing wind forces [in the body] might be provoked. That would be how my death would come about. That would be an obstruction for me.' Then the monk should investigate: 'Are there any evil, unskillful mental qualities unabandoned by me that would be an obstruction for me were I to die in the night?' If, on reflecting, he realizes that there are evil, unskillful mental qualities unabandoned by him that would be an obstruction for him were he to die in the night, then he should put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, undivided mindfulness, & alertness for the abandoning of those very same evil, unskillful qualities. Just as when a person whose turban or head was on fire would put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, undivided mindfulness, & alertness to put out the fire on his turban or head, in the same way the monk should put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, undivided mindfulness, & alertness for the abandoning of those very same evil, unskillful qualities. But if, on reflecting, he realizes that there are no evil, unskillful mental qualities unabandoned by him that would be an obstruction for him were he to die in the night, then for that very reason he should dwell in joy & rapture, training himself day & night in skillful qualities.

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

The Suttas talk about the Bodhisattva ...singular. The Buddha to be. In our age that was Gautama Siddhartha. All other Bodhisattvas are literary devices and/or left overs from the Vedanta. Which were smuggled back into Buddhism via the Mahayana. Do you really not know Nana that this is the mainstream Theravada view ? Or do you just like playing Maras Advocate ?

The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

In every age there is one Buddha per world system. Shakyamuni is the Buddha for this age. Metteya for the next age/world system.

Avalokiteshvara , Tara, Manjushri et al are borrowings from the Vedanta incorporated into the mahayana by a regrettable lapse into the pre Buddhist cosmology of the Indian Subcontinent. Gilding the lily.

The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.